Supervisor8inance

Here is the English translation of the op-ed, maintaining the dramatic and analytical tone of the original Vietnamese version.
Trump's Legal "Boomerang": How a Ruling of Unconstitutionality Triggered a Massive Refund Wave and Political Precariousness
February 24, 2026
The U.S. Supreme Court’s earth-shattering decision to declare President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) for imposing tariffs as unconstitutional is not merely a legal defeat. It is a resounding "slap in the face" to his strategy of economic governance via executive order. Furthermore, it unlocks a scenario unprecedented in modern trade history: The collapse of a tariff barrier resulting in an obligation to refund billions of dollars.
Mr. Trump’s hasty imposition of a new 10% tariff for a 150-day period, effective today (February 24, 2026), is nothing more than a temporary "tourniquet." Behind this move lies a chaotic landscape of liability, finance, and fractured power.
1. The Refund "Flood": The Cost of an Unconstitutional Decision
The most intriguing and fatal flaw revealed by this ruling lies in the retroactive nature of unconstitutionality. When the Supreme Court declared the legal basis for tariff waves prior to February 24, 2026, null and void, it effectively meant the U.S. government had collected money from citizens and businesses illegally.
The direct consequence is a Mandatory Refund Mechanism:
A Reversed Cash Flow: Instead of collecting revenue to fund political ambitions, the U.S. Treasury now faces the legal obligation to repay the taxes it wrongfully collected. This is a severe blow to the Trump administration's financial credibility.
The Real Beneficiaries:
U.S. Importers: Companies that grit their teeth and paid high taxes to import goods are now entitled to recover these funds. This represents a massive, unexpected injection of capital to help them recover after a period of suppression.
Consumers (The People): While more complex, U.S. citizens now have valid grounds—through class-action lawsuits—to reclaim the price differences they were forced to pay due to tariffs being passed down into product costs.
Foreign Exporters: Depending on trade terms (Incoterms), if the exporting party bore the tariff costs, they have the right to claim these amounts back from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Clearly, the initial error of choosing IEEPA—a statute designed for genuine national emergencies, not standard trade regulation—has transformed Trump from a "protector of manufacturing" into a "debtor" to his own people and trade partners.
2. The Blame Game and the Nature of the Strategic Error
Despite the crisis stemming from his choice of the wrong legal instrument, Donald Trump is redirecting the spear of public opinion toward the Courts and partner nations.
A Subjective Error: Using IEEPA was a high-risk gamble against which legal advisors undoubtedly warned. Trump chose a shortcut to bypass Congress, and now he is paying the price as the Court blocks that path.
Complicating the Issue: Rather than admitting a technical error, Trump is blaming other countries for "scheming to renegotiate," creating an unnecessary hostile atmosphere. In reality, these nations are simply reacting to the inconsistency of U.S. policy.
Who is Responsible? None other than Donald Trump. He signed the executive orders, and he bears full responsibility for the current chaos in global financial markets.
3. "Paralyzed" Policy: The Fragility of Trump's Power
The second point, and perhaps the more dangerous one for Trump's term, is the shift in the balance of power in Washington D.C. from now until the end of the year.
The decision to impose a new 10% tariff is valid for only 150 days (a statutory limit for trade acts lacking Congressional ratification). This 150-day figure is a high-pressure countdown clock.
Dependence on Congress: Trump can no longer act unilaterally as a "king." Any long-term tax policy beyond these 150 days requires the nod of both the Senate and the House.
The Risk from "Allies": It would take only a small faction of Republican lawmakers in the Senate or House to feel disgruntled (perhaps due to pressure from corporate donors eager for quick refunds, or concerns over inflation) to block any efforts to extend the tariffs.
Policy Disruption: Businesses despise uncertainty above all else. The fact that tax policy is only certain for 150 days before being left in limbo will cause investment to stagnate. Foreign partners will choose a "wait-and-see" approach rather than making concessions to Trump, knowing his power is now clamped down by both the Courts and Congress.
Conclusion
February 24, 2026, marks an ironic turning point: Donald Trump’s "America First" policy has resulted in the U.S. Government having to refund money to its citizens and the world.
Donald Trump stands before a difficult chessboard. He has lost his sharpest sword—the power of arbitrary taxation (via IEEPA)—and must now defend himself with a makeshift shield (the 150-day tariff). From now until the end of the year, we will likely not see a Donald Trump who "breathes fire" with surprise executive orders, but rather a President bound by legal procedures, Congressional hearings, and the burden of resolving the financial aftermath of his own making.

La Era Trump: La Decadencia de un Imperio a Través de Decisiones Erróneas

Muchos observadores creen que Estados Unidos bajo la administración de Donald Trump está pasando por una profunda fase de "comercio interno". En lugar de una prosperidad sostenible, lo que queda es una economía costosa y una posición internacional gravemente tambaleante.

1. Impuestos altos y la carga de mercancías caras

La política central de Trump – "Los aranceles son la solución para todos los problemas" – ha tenido un efecto contraproducente directamente en los bolsillos de la gente.

Deja de culpar a la Reserva Federal, deja de culpar a los fondos de venta masiva.

Es lo mismo cada año, antes y después de Navidad, BTC tendrá una ronda de descuentos. La razón es que las empresas que poseen BTC necesitan un balance financiero que muestre ganancias antes de que termine el 31 de diciembre y la demanda de venta siempre está presente, los pequeños tenedores de BTC también necesitan efectivo para resolver problemas personales como viajar, el árbol de Navidad, etc.
Pero esa no es la única venta. Antes del Año Nuevo Lunar de los chinos, hay otra caída profunda. La razón: el efectivo es lo primero y un Año Nuevo acogedor. Aunque el itinerario de visita a casa, etc.

#Chiasegiaodichcuaban $ONT


¡El contrato de futuros ONT/USDT se está calentando! 🚀

Ontology (ONT) está causando sensación en el mercado hoy con un enorme aumento del +2% en las últimas 24 horas 📈. El volumen de transacciones ha explotado, superando 3.15B ONT, lo que muestra que tanto las ballenas como los traders minoristas están participando.

China se prepara para la era de dominio con Ontology